UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, March 05, 2009

The UFO Dialectic


There isn’t one.

UFO discussion nowadays is fraught with passionate bias, but no real access to new thinking about the phenomenon.

UFOs, via ufology (the study of UFOs that pretends to be a scientific discipline), have been given short shrift by those who grab hold of discussions and demean the phenomenon by assy beliefs and self-aggrandizing colloquies.

The UFO waters have become so muddied by all the discursive blogs and web-sites about UFOs that no one can make sense of anything UFO-related.

No one is studying the phenomenon as it exists, but many are evoking UFOs (and flying saucers) as they existed, especially the Roswell anecdotal material.

Web-sites such as Frank Warren’s The UFO Chronicles merely pile on UFO account and sightings, without any scrutiny of those accounts and sightings.


There is no discussion about the UFO sightings at Chronicles, just account after account, and story after story.

This isn’t bad, in that discussion about UFOs at blogs, such as Kevin Randle’s A Different Perspective, contain commentary by Mr. Randle related to old UFO events, in his case, Roswell, and comments from readers that are tiresome in their repetitiveness and biases.


Randle’s blog is totally useless, whereas Warren’s blog (or web-site) at least has material about new and old sightings, although Mr. Warren’s efforts are just like many other UFO aficionados – lots of photos, witness accounts, and newspaper clippings, all avoiding scientific perusal or dialectic.

The mess that is “ufology” has corrupted the UFO phenomenon so badly that scientists, academics, and media won’t take the phenomenon seriously.

One would think that UFO fanatics would have learnt a lesson from the flying saucer follies of the fifties, that nonsense having almost eviscerated UFO discussion by any sane person(s).

The great Donald Keyhoe kept UFOs and flying discs from becoming a total laughing stock, but there is no one around today with his charisma and stoic demeanor.


We don’t expect a UFO dialectic or any scientific effort to determine what the phenomenon was or is.

The internet and the nuts who have glommed on to UFOs to showcase their inane thinking about them have made any serious discussion or study of UFOs virtually impossible.

As we’ve said many times, the UFO phenomenon needs a whole new makeover, and discipline that shakes off the ufology epithet and the persons who continue to flog UFOs with insipid and asinine discussion about them.

A closed, underground group might pull this off, and we hear there’s a movement afoot to do just that…


  • Conversely, I think you could go into a philosophy of this "dialectic" more at length to enhance this discussion. It caught my eye because as a teenager I began coming up with a theory about the cold war called "The Technology Dialectic." Its an idea that those really in the know about the other-worldy phenomenon used a complex dialectic to advance their cause, not just for America, but more organically for the world. Hard to say what that would like like behind the scenes now, but that a lie this big would be too-big-to-fail.
    My theory was that international leaders in the 1940s saw two incredible things happen around the same time. The success of world war 2 at mobilizing entire populations in war efforts to create new technologies, submitting to the political process of that mostly unquestioningly; and secondly, the appearance of other-worldly beings with advanced technology which to them posed a threat, they being in the business of threat. Stunningly, it was proposed by someone, to create a fake international war or conflict in order to finance the build up to this perceieved threat, and finance a worldy defence network such as with atomic weapons on rockets, computers, etc, through these competing new war efforts, and later the brilliant "space race", in order to "defend earth" which also has great Keynesian economic value for the Military Industrial COmplex. This became the Cold War: "The Technology Dialectic". Once it developed to the point of Reagan's "star wars" I predicted an end to the cold war, it having beared its fruit, and I was the only one I know of who had a theory that correctly predicted the end of the cold war! But chaos prevails, and we still find ourselves with its usefulness, and illusiveness.
    If I was wrong about it, at least as far as a consciously run conspiracy, I think I was right that it could at least be a kind of unconscious conspiracy, as this seems to be how our brutal human evolution transpires. But intellectually, to have a dialectic, such as argumentively, we must be willing to engage in rigorous philosophical speculation which gives us the creativity to truly advance our situation. This has become taboo in UFOlogy, but also in science culture in general. So even your statement here itself cautiously holds back on the very thing it calls for. Or maybe I just want to say it more clearly that until the philosophers can help us think about this subject, not as laymen, but as experts, and yet artists, the fog of cold will continue to waft through the pages of UFOlogy. (Disclosure: I later wrote a screenplay based on my early theories, and other interests, which is titled Grey Propaganda, by Ken Boe, and listed at the Amazon.com screen writing project.)

    By Blogger kenboe, at Wednesday, July 11, 2012  

Post a Comment

<< Home